Originally Posted by
chaadster
That’s all totally irrelevant to my point and irrelevant to stated goals of the city planners so I won’t comment on that stuff.
What you said misleads people. Your "point" wasn't clear at all.
Originally Posted by
chaadster
While (get more people on bikes and public transit is) laudable, there’s a knock-on effect in that increased driving difficulty raises driver frustration, which in turn leads to harsh decision making and sometimes dangerous and risky driving.
This is suggesting that traffic calming makes "dangerous and risky driving"
worse. That's the exact
opposite of what it's supposed to do (
the direct effect)!
The only benefit you list for traffic calming (call "laudable") is "get more people on bikes and public transit is", which is a
secondary effect.
And, if traffic calming fails to reduce "dangerous and risky driving", then the "laudable" goal would be the of deceiving people.